Aibu to tell her that she needs to do a full shift.

[DawnFawn]

Hi,

Posting here for traffic to see I'd any managers/HR gurus knocking about.

I am a fairly new manager, I have been managing a department for about 2 months and all is running pretty well, however, I have an issue with a member off staff that I cant get my head around.

Let's call her Linda, she started under a previous manager who was a friend of hers. She doesn't drive and lives about 15 miles away with not great/not horrendous public transport links.

For about 18 months she got a lift to and from work with manager friend. But since manager friend left she was able to finish work earlier than the rest of the team, to get a lift home with another member of staff who finishes earlier. The stand in manager allowed this for an easy ride.

So......(thankyou if you are still reading)
In I come as a department manager, there is a festering resentment with team members that colleague is going home early, and it shouldn't be allowed. I totally agree but how do I stop this? She doesn't have any children, and doesn't require flexible working as such.

Would I be a bitch to say that she needs to be making her own way home? I'll allow a degree of flexibilty in the mornings, she can start 15 minutes later as this is when her lift arrives at the office, but she needs to finish with the rest of the team? Does she have any rights to say that she has been doing this for a while and should be allowed to continue?

think you need to put an end to the 'leaving early' unless she can start work early to cover the loss.

At the end of the day, if everyone wanted to leave early that would be unacceptable, so why should she carry on doing this?

She leaves "early" because she is paid to do less hours.

@rookiemere she’s paid less because she leaves early. It’s an informal arrangement with some kind of timesheets/ clocking in and out to measure actual hours worked for pay. And the other staff are annoyed at picking up the slack

Get her to make the adjustments to her lunch hour. If she has an hour for lunch then cut it to half an hour as she’s 15 minutes late in morning and leaving 15 minutes early or just dock her half an hours wage

HR person here too. Flexibility and remote working is becoming more and more effective as it becomes easier to log in from home. If you came to me with this problem I'd be interested in how you are measuring effectiveness in your team? Does this worker do the same or more than her colleagues? Depending on the kind of work you do, does it actually matter whether she is present in the office? Could you raise the productivity of the whole team by allowing more remote working? All depends on what you actually do. Front line working does not lend itself to remote working. Turn the problem on its head by getting her to do some thinking too. Best of luck

It’s an informal arrangement with some kind of timesheets/ clocking in and out to measure actual hours worked for pay. And the other staff are annoyed at picking up the slack

Has the OP actually said that about the timesheets/clocking in?

The person who says custom & practice do not apply- why not? She's been working based on agreement from previous mgr to work 7 hours 7am-2pm with pay pro rata'd. For 18 months. She could presumably demonstrate this through payslip and the lack of any disciplinary!

So she's applied for & got reduced hours. OP needs to get agreement from senior team to raise headcount back up by the extra 5 hours, by making her business case that it's inefficient to have no junior cover for last 45 mins of each shift.

Once she has agreement she can then ask Linda if she would like to apply for the extra 5 hours again, or reduce down to 20 hrs per week so you can get another part timer to cover for her.

Fuck Linda esp if she doesn't have DC, (in which case I would say just leave it be) but in her case she needs to get a bus or drive in herself or take driving lessons.

I'll bet the person driving 'Linda' wishes she didn't have to and that she gets the sack

Janet and George are key they have to work with her so you really need to find out their opinions on the matter and how much it bothers them and if necessary sack Linda due to sickness / absence levels and hire someone new who doesnt take the piss.

Bottom line the work is not getting done with Linda as part of your team so she has to go.

You’d be mad to bring this up before checking with HR when she’s been being paid her hours worked for 18 months. The two other people doing unpaid overtime are the main problem.

Can you rota the end of day processes and then when it is Lindas turn she will have to get the bus like a normal person?

I can’t see you’ll get a lot of thanks for losing one experienced employee and then paying for the extra 5 hours per week in addition.

There are 2 separate issues here; firstly the sickness/absence and secondly the time she starts and finishes. You must keep these two separate.

Firstly the sickness - you need to ascertain all the reasons her sickness within the last 12 months. These are the ones that count if you are going to look at a sickness review.

Secondly, the times...the previous managers have left you in rather a sticky spot. Yes, she should work the same hours as the rest of the team unless there are pre-existing medical conditions to take into account. I know I might be seen as being unfair here but having children is not a reason to allow anyone to finish or leave early if it wasn't agreed at interview - Otherwise people without children would have a genuine reason for putting a claim in for discrimination. This arrangement was agreed by the original manager. the second manager has also agreed to allow it to continue. Its been 18 months and nothing was said or done. She is not getting paid for the time. The other staff had plenty of time to complain. You should seek legal advice. I have defended cases not to dissimilar to this in employment tribunals and the president has been set. If you go in and try to create change [even if it may be the right one] you could find yourself on the wrong side of a grievance. It appears a little like you want to prove yourself as a manager by making the department more efficient and sorting out problems and that is not necessarily a bad thing however it can ruffle feathers. I know you may think this is unfair, and in some way's it is, however tread carefully. Speak with your HR advisors and any legal professionals you may have as a consultancy basis.

I hope that is some help OP. Good luck.

Think about how those extra minutes will effect productivity I had a job that forced me out of the house for 13 hours a day with only 9 at work I arranged with a manager to start 5 minutes later and finish 5 minutes earlier and my productivity went way up for the sake of 10 minutes (this was disability related) then the ops manager put a stop
To it two weeks later I was in a disciplinary for low productivity I quit it’s all about weighing up what those few minutes will do to her (this is the human angle at least not the legal one)

No to a late start and an early dart. Perhaps if it were the odd occasion but it's daily. What if the rest of the staff decide to rock up late and piss off early, were would you be then? You're the manager, manage her.

I work with a Linda. She frequently comes in late and leaves early. No-one in authority says anything about It and when she comes in late it doesn't really affect me. However when she pisses off even a couple of minutes early, clients are still phoning and someone has to answer the phone. So I (or one other) can answer the phone to one of her direct boss's clients at 2 minutes to finishing time and be there for 10 minutes afterwards. It doesn't matter how many times I send an email to her boss copied to her at 10 minutes after finishing time "stating because she left early I had to deal with whatever" she continues to do it. To be honest this is just the tip of the iceberg and I have no idea how her mind works but the resentment is palpable.

This doesn't answer your query but I feel better after my rant ☹️

I would approach with caution ((senior HR manager) .. what you don't want is her saying she is being bullied and you do not like her and that you are trying to throw your authority at her. she has been allowed to do the reduced hours for so long and although her colleagues are unhappy I am guessing no one has ever really voiced an opinion (old boss/friend etc) . I would suggest 121 and propose a reduced hours to accommodate her travel / valued member of staff etc make her feel that you are trying to make her role and hours transparent .. if she does not want to do this then she would need to sort out her own travel arrangements . I would not be offering to allow her to arrive late . she has a contractual agreement and that's the end of it .. more than happy to change contract to suit her needs but not compromise .. so 1 or the other

I am totally confused?

Surely if she is contracted 40 hours, she works 40 hours.
If she wants to work less, she reduces hours and changes contracted hours and you have those 5 hours back in your budget?

If it doesn’t fit with the service, request to reduce is declined?

I don’t understand how you can be contracted 40 hours but choose to work less?

It sounds to me like she is technically working part time and being paid for part time. And iirc a contract is still valid even if it was a verbal agreement.
I accept she may not be popular but jts basically tough. I remember when our office hours were extended and instead if closing to the public at 4 we closed at 5 - hardly late but people were used to leaving early (flexi) and of course the part timers mostly had child care and didnt have to stay late.

If it is 15 minutes per day or even 30 ,can she not have one long day ? She would then have to make her own way home , I guess it depends if people are still on site at the later time. She is definitely a CF and it needs to be stopped .

If I was her union rep (union rep here) I would suggest more or less what the HR professional suggested - work the hours or pro-rata reduce the pay - your choice. This could be done in a non-threatening way that would limit your chance of any comeback.

You don't need to be a mum and can be single and have care commitments, so I wouldn't (necessarily) bring that up.

If she has been permitted to work less time due to her transport issues up till now, I think it would be best to continue the arrangement. HOWEVER, her pay should be adjusted if this is going to be a permanent arrangement. I have known several people who've had adjustments due to transport difficulties, and this was accepted and no one resented it; but they accepted reduced pay as a result - I can see that others would resent someone who has the same pay for shorter hours. It also depends on what type of work it is - could she do some of her work '21st-century-style' from home on a computer or even by Skype? I do realize that this wouldn't be possible for many jobs, even today.

It would be advisable to speak to your HR Department for their advice before you commence any action regarding this person. Following procedures is paramount as what seems straight forward often is not in Employment law, & a lot of cases that go to tribunal are awarded against employers because of incorrect procedures. For example the WTR allow an uninterrupted 20 minute break if the working hours are more than 6 so if you were suggesting making the time up at lunch you may fall foul of this. She could put in a grievance against you which may not look very good in your relatively new position, so advice is your best weapon to ensure a good outcome for all. It also makes you look professional by ensuring you have the correct knowledge to deal with the situation effectively.

I think there is such a thing as 'custom and practice' in HR in that she has been allowed to work this way for such a long time, it has become her custom and practice and you can't suddenly come in and tell her to work differently. Check it out.

Employers must be aware that, left unchecked, long-standing customs and practices may automatically become part of an employee’s working terms and contract, even if this was never the employer’s intention.

"If the employer suddenly revokes an established practice without just cause, or they have not made any formal provision to explain or clarify their position, employees may claim that the practice is now an implied term of employment and cannot be removed without their consent."

“RafaIsTheKingOfClay

It’s an informal arrangement with some kind of timesheets/ clocking in and out to measure actual hours worked for pay. And the other staff are annoyed at picking up the slack

Has the OP actually said that about the timesheets/clocking in?”

No but how else could this work? Say a shift is 8 hours, she’s doing 7 and only paid for 7. She has to be declaring this unusual shift pattern somehow doesn’t she? OP has said many times she’s only being paid for the reduced hours

What does her employment contract say? If it says she should work 8 hours then she should work 8 hours. Sounds like she has no genuine reason for special treatment just arriving late and finishing early is convenient to her. I would not allow it.